• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Tyrannides (1 Viewer)

E. virescens is acadicus?
"Empidonax acadicus (Gmelin 1789)" was the name that was used back then for the Acadian Flycatcher, now Empidonax virescens (Vieillot 1818).
(Muscicapa acadica Gmelin: [OD]. This name is based exclusively on the "Lesser crested Fly-catcher" (alt. Lesser-crested") of Pennant's Arctic Zoology, 2:386: [here]. This name was discarded as a nomen dubium by Brewster 1895; Ridgway 1907 and Cory & Hellmayr 1927 placed it with a question mark in the synonymy of Empidonax minimus. (Which, incidentally, is also what the more recent authors have interpreted Platyrhynchus pusillus Swainson to be.))

Anyway, to quote Olson & Suarez 2008:
That Cabanis was looking at specimens of the Cuban species when he proposed the genus Gymnoglaux is irrelevant, because the type of a genus is a specific epithet, not a specimen.
The same applies to Empidonax: the type is the nominal species denoted by the available species-group name cited in the OD. The taxonomic species to which the bird(s) that Cabanis was looking at (*) when he proposed it is irrelevant.

(*) If any...? I'm not clear that Cabanis had seen Gundlach's bird. If I understand the introductory text of the first part of the Beiträge [here] correctly, Gundlach resided in Cuba, sending most of his birds to Cassel in Germany, but also owning a small personal collection. In the text, only one individual of this species is mentioned by Gundlach, a bird found dead on a flat roof in Habana. That specimen must still have been in Gundlach's possession at a later time, if he was able to send it to Lawrence : chances are that the bird never left Cuba before this. In this case, Cabanis would only have been looking at published descriptions of the species when he proposed the name.
 
Is Xolmis cinereus the type species of Xolmis?

I have two contradictory sources, here :
https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/50637#page/182/mode/1up

and here :
https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/21258#page/24/mode/1up
Both are wrong in the method of type fixation they implement.
The genus was proposed in 1826 [here], without any originally included nominal species. (No available species-group name is associated to the generic name in the OD.) Boie first subsequently (in 1828 [here]) included
  • Muscicapa moesta Lichst. Az.
  • M. vittigera Lichst. Az.
  • M. mysticalis Spix
  • M. velata Lichst.
  • M. bicolor Gm.
These are to be treated as the originally included nominal species, and are the only nominal species eligible to become the type (cf. [Art.67.2.2] of ICZN). You need a subsequent designation of one of these.
 
Last edited:
You need a subsequent designation of one of these.
The first I find right now:
Muscicapa moesta Lichtenstein 1823 [OD] -- (indirect) subsequent designation of Sclater 1888 (Sclater designated "Taenioptera irupero" on p. 10 [here], not an OINS, and placed the OINS Muscicapa moesta Lichenstein 1823 in its synonymy on p. 14 [here]; cf. [Art.69.2.2]).
Still treated as a synonym of Tyrannus irupero Vieillot 1823 nowadays -- so that, taxonomically, this is equivalent to the direct acceptation of Sclater's designation (of T. irupero Vieillot) by Traylor in the Peters Check-List.
 
Last edited:
Fjeldsa, Jon; Ohlson, Jan I.; Batalha Filho, Henrique; Ericson, Per; Irestedt, Martin. Rapid expansion and diversification into new niche space by fluvicoline flycatchers. Journal of Avian Biology, Recently accepted articles, 8 January 2018.

Abstract:

TiF Update February 3

Fluvicolinae: The Fluvicolinae have been rearranged based on Fjeldså et al. (2018). Although their phylogeny seems generally more reliable than what I cobbled together from previous work, some of the nodes are still poorly resolved. I have mostly followed their Figure 2. However, although their work suggests that Empidonax is not monophyletic, I have not made changes to Empidonax due to some weakly supported nodes.

I have carved up Xolmis. To do this, I moved the Black-and-white Monjita, now Heteroxolmis dominicanus, to Heteroxolmis and the Fire-eyed Diucon, now Pyrope pyrope, to Pyrope. I've also moved the Black-crowned Monjita, Neoxolmis coronatus, Rusty-backed Monjita, Neoxolmis rubetra, and Salinas Monjita, Neoxolmis salinarum, to Neoxolmis from Xolmis. Finally, the Gray Monjita, now Taenioptera cinerea, has been placed in Taenioptera.

Finally, there are some splits. Darwin's Flycatcher, Pyrocephalus nanus, the extinct San Cristobal Flycatcher, Pyrocephalus dubius, and Scarlet Flycatcher, Pyrocephalus rubinus, are split from the Vermilion Flycatcher, now called Pyrocephalus obscurus. See Carmi et al. (2016).

Further, the Blackish Chat-Tyrant, Ochthoeca nigrita, and Maroon-belted Chat-Tyrant, Ochthoeca thoracica, have been split from the Slaty-backed Chat-Tyrant, Ochthoeca cinnamomeiventris, based on a combination of Fjeldså et al. (2018), Ridgely and Greenfield (2001), Hilty (2003), and Garcia-Moreno et al. (1998).
 
For the Gray Monjita, I had used Nengetus Swainson, 1827 instead of Taenioptera Bonaparte, 1825(?) due to my doubt of the correct year of Taenioptera (1825, 1830 or 1831).
 
Last edited:
Bonaparte's "Muscicapa tænioptera, Nob." = here (1825):
... which is a Muscicapa of our classification, but a Tyrannus of his : a peculiar subgenus might be instituted for it under the name of the species, which we have for that reason compounded from the Greek. This subgenus should be characterized principally by long and powerful wings, reaching nearly to the tip of the tail, a somewhat more robust and elongated bill, and much stouter and longer feet.

His "LES GOBES-MOUCHES, (MUSCICAPA, L.)" = here (1830):
Si dica lo stesso della mia Muscicapa taenioptera (tipo del mio sottogenere di questo nome ) che ......

And his "Tænioptera, Nob." = here (1831)

If of any use?
 
in the first two links, I have the feeling that the name Taenioptera was not explicitly established as a new genus, unlike the third link. In the latter, both names are mentioned: Taenioptera as an independent genus (with, probably, its own type species) and Nengetus (including Xolmis) close to Fluvicola whereas here Taenioptera and Nengetus are mentioned as synonyms of Xolmis with the same type species : Muscicapa taenioptera = Tyrannus cinereus Vieill.
 
Last edited:
For the Gray Monjita, I had used Nengetus Swainson, 1827 instead of Taenioptera Bonaparte, 1825(?) due to my doubt of the correct year of Taenioptera (1825, 1830 or 1831).

TiF Update February 4

Fluvicolinae: The Gray Monjita becomes Nengetus cinereus rather than Taenioptera cinerea. The monotypic genus Nengetus was established by Swainson in 1827. The Gray Monjita had historically been in the genus Taenioptera (Bonaparte 1825), of which it is the type (e.g. Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum). However, although Bonaparte alluded to Taenioptera as a subgenus in 1825, he did not actually establish the name until 1831. Thus Nengetus has priority.
 
TiF Update February 4

Fluvicolinae: The Gray Monjita becomes Nengetus cinereus rather than Taenioptera cinerea. The monotypic genus Nengetus was established by Swainson in 1827. The Gray Monjita had historically been in the genus Taenioptera (Bonaparte 1825), of which it is the type (e.g. Catalogue of the Birds in the British Museum). However, although Bonaparte alluded to Taenioptera as a subgenus in 1825, he did not actually establish the name until 1831. Thus Nengetus has priority.


in the first two links, I have the feeling that the name Taenioptera was not explicitly established as a new genus, unlike the third link. In the latter, both names are mentioned: Taenioptera as an independent genus (with, probably, its own type species) and Nengetus (including Xolmis) close to Fluvicola whereas here Taenioptera and Nengetus are mentioned as synonyms of Xolmis with the same type species : Muscicapa taenioptera = Tyrannus cinereus Vieill.

QED
 
Elaenia spp

Qian Tang, Scott V. Edwards, Frank E. Rheindt. Rapid diversification and hybridization have shaped the dynamic history of the genus Elaenia. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 18 May 2018.

Abstract:

Multi-locus data have proven invaluable in phylogenetic reconstruction and species delimitation. However, the mixed genetic signal from different loci can make inference of evolutionary history challenging and may produce incongruences depending on analytical and marker choice. Aside from incomplete lineage sorting (ILS) following diversification events that have had little time for deep differentiation, the most common causes of incongruent phylogenies are genetic introgression confounding a bifurcating evolutionary trajectory. In this study, we used multi-locus analytical approaches on sequence data of nine loci from 80 individuals of over 20 Neotropical Elaenia flycatcher species to examine the systematics, molecular phylogeny and species limits of this complex genus. Our results provide a robust phylogeny and estimates of species limits within Elaenia, but point to important cases of incongruences among phylogenies based on different analytical approaches. Simulations and estimates of divergence times provide reasonable explanations for the incongruent placement of some Elaenia taxa, pointing to multiple cases of both ILS and introgression within the genus. Molecular dating of major evolutionary events revealed intensive diversification during the Pleistocene, suggesting a central role of climate oscillations in the evolution of Elaenia flycatchers.
 
Qian Tang, Scott V. Edwards, Frank E. Rheindt. Rapid diversification and hybridization have shaped the dynamic history of the genus Elaenia. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 18 May 2018.

Abstract:

Multi-locus data have proven invaluable in phylogenetic reconstruction and species delimitation. However, the mixed genetic signal from different loci can make inference of evolutionary history challenging and may produce incongruences depending on analytical and marker choice. Aside from incomplete lineage sorting (ILS) following diversification events that have had little time for deep differentiation, the most common causes of incongruent phylogenies are genetic introgression confounding a bifurcating evolutionary trajectory. In this study, we used multi-locus analytical approaches on sequence data of nine loci from 80 individuals of over 20 Neotropical Elaenia flycatcher species to examine the systematics, molecular phylogeny and species limits of this complex genus. Our results provide a robust phylogeny and estimates of species limits within Elaenia, but point to important cases of incongruences among phylogenies based on different analytical approaches. Simulations and estimates of divergence times provide reasonable explanations for the incongruent placement of some Elaenia taxa, pointing to multiple cases of both ILS and introgression within the genus. Molecular dating of major evolutionary events revealed intensive diversification during the Pleistocene, suggesting a central role of climate oscillations in the evolution of Elaenia flycatchers.

Elaenia is monophyletic. Elaenia chilensis is a synonym of Elaenia pallatangae
 
Elaenia spp

Qian Tang, Scott V. Edwards, Frank E. Rheindt. Rapid diversification and hybridization have shaped the dynamic history of the genus Elaenia. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, In Press, Corrected Proof, Available online 18 May 2018.

Abstract:

Multi-locus data have proven invaluable in phylogenetic reconstruction and species delimitation. However, the mixed genetic signal from different loci can make inference of evolutionary history challenging and may produce incongruences depending on analytical and marker choice. Aside from incomplete lineage sorting (ILS) following diversification events that have had little time for deep differentiation, the most common causes of incongruent phylogenies are genetic introgression confounding a bifurcating evolutionary trajectory. In this study, we used multi-locus analytical approaches on sequence data of nine loci from 80 individuals of over 20 Neotropical Elaenia flycatcher species to examine the systematics, molecular phylogeny and species limits of this complex genus. Our results provide a robust phylogeny and estimates of species limits within Elaenia, but point to important cases of incongruences among phylogenies based on different analytical approaches. Simulations and estimates of divergence times provide reasonable explanations for the incongruent placement of some Elaenia taxa, pointing to multiple cases of both ILS and introgression within the genus. Molecular dating of major evolutionary events revealed intensive diversification during the Pleistocene, suggesting a central role of climate oscillations in the evolution of Elaenia flycatchers.

TiF Update May 19
Elaenias: Based on Tang et al. (2018), I have rearranged Elaenia and returned Chilean Elaenia, Elaenia chilensis, to Sierran Elaenia, Elaenia pallatangae.
 
Nonnula ruficapilla nattereri Hartert, E & Hellmayr, 1921

Why is Hellmayr also author of Nonnula ruficapilla nattereri? I thought as Hartert read the article he is the only author? Of course both are mentioned in the name of the subspecies. But I remember similar cases whith one author only.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top